Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by Bjorkman & Johnny Mac, Nov 3, 2009.
Rebound Ace- Agassi
Clay - Borg
Grass - Federer
Aussie HC - Federer
US HC - Federer
Indoors - Federer
If it weren't for goNads, clay would've been Fed too. How scary?
Thats a good list.
Mine would look like this:
to the OP's list i take nothing and add nothing... it's the perfect one.
Stephane Lambiel - Ice
Very good list. Of course grass has changed so much maybe we have to divide into eras. Like pre 01-02 faster grass and post 01-02 Slower grass?
How do u have Fed as the GOAT for indoor carpeting? its obsolete anymore.
Thanx. Absolutely, according to the "experts" the grass in Wimbledon slowed down in 2002, i guess thats why Hewitt could win it? I doubt Hewitt would have won on the 90`s grass.
GOAT on fast grass: Sampras
Goat on each surface:
Australian...Andre(for now), slightly ahead of Roger
SW19.........Pete(for now), slightly ahead of Roger
who’s the best on each surface:
Hey TMF, about your sig, did Azzurri really write that?? :shock::shock:
He seems to me as a very good poster
Roger would have to manage another 2-3 AO's I think to suprass Andre. 2 Wimbeldons to surpass Pete (though he can be arguable I guess if he ties Pete of course that will still be debateable considering most think Pete had more grass court competiton and played under totally different conditions). USO Roger definitely.
Nadal needs another few to surpass Borg. Will Roger actually accomplish these feats though closing in on 30 years of age?
^^^It's being taken out of context. Azzurri meant that it is much worse being defeated in the finals than losing in an earlier round. Once you get to a final, there is more hope, and losing could be devastating as opposed to losing in an earlier round. Winning or losing in a final carries much more weight to it, than winning/losing in an early round. I agree with his assessment.
Oh...well that explains it, words taken out of context can easily mess up things
Roger just need one more AO and arguably he is ahead of Andre. Keep in mind Roger lost to the eventual winners….Safin in 2005, Nole in 2008 and rafa in 2009. But Andre lost to players who never became the eventual champion.
If Federer wins another SW19, that will be his 8th final appearances(Pete only 7). Roger is also the record holder for most consecutive match won on grass. About you saying Pete had more competition, that’s subjective or opinion, not facts.
If Nadal win 6 RG, he’s definitely ahead of Borg b/c of his prowess on other clay tournaments including the MS, and the sheer domination of the entire clay season.
Very good lost,I agree with it except the indoor carpet where I would put Mcenroe as the best ahead of Becker(sligthly though,Boris was a beast indoors).
I agree with it too, but I'm still undecided if I would put McEnroe or Lendl instead of Becker.
Fast Hardcourt should be Pete Sampras...
Becker rules indoors and carpet... The greatest carpet player of all time.
Clay - Blake
Grass - Lendl
Fast HC - Berasetegui
Indoor carpet - Nadal
Alex Clayton ????? ??????
I can tell you're not Fedace. I call tell from my previous experiences with Fedace.
Indoor Carpet - Becker great but not the best
Why do you think that when there are at least 3 players with better records than he?
Indoor Carpet Majors (Masters Cup + WCT Finals + Grand Slam Cup)
McEnroe 3 Masters + 5 WCT Finals = 8 Indoor Majors
Lendl 5 Masters + 2 WCT Finals = 7 Indoor Majors
Sampras 5 Masters + 2 Grand Slam Cups = 7 Indoor Majors
Becker 3 Masters + 1 WCT Final + 1 Grand Slam Cup = 5 Indoor Majors
I do agree he was a fantastic player on the surface though and very hard to beat.
My pick for best indoor is Lendl - 9 Masters finals in a row!
GOAT by surface
Fast Grass (Wimbledon pre-2002): Sampras
Slow Grass (Wimbledon 2002+): Federer
Indoor Carpet: Lendl/Sampras
Slow Hard (eg Australian Open 1988 onwards): Agassi/Federer
Fast Hard: Federer/Sampras
True grass: Steffi Graf or Navratilova
2002-onwards grass: Venus or Serena Williams
Decoturf: Serena Williams or Steffi Graf
Rebound Ace: Monica Seles or Steffi Graf
Clay: Steffi Graf, Monica Seles, Justine Henin, or Chris Evert
Indoors: Martina Navratilova
Overall: Steffi Graf
True grass: Pete Sampras
2002-onwards grass: Roger Federer or Rafael Nadal
Rebound ace: Andre Agassi or Roger Federer
Decoturf: Pete Sampras or Roger Federer
Indoors: Pete Sampras
Clay: Bjorn Borg or Rafael Nadal
Overall: Rod Laver or Pete Sampras
My god...talk about NOT acknowledging Federer...this is ridiculous! Thought you were a good objective poster
Good list, but I'd say that Federer is as good of a rebound ace player as Agassi, and Lendl is probably stronger indoors than Becker.
LOL how did I not acknowledge him. I picked him as maybe the best on 3 different surfaces (counting the new grass). Or did you expect I should pick him as the greatest ever on clay, old grass (which he hardly ever played on) or indoors too, LOL!
No i didnt, but what I dont understand is how you can pick Nadal as one of 2 greatest ever on the slow grass.
Federer ever hardly go a chance to play on indoor-carpet but i can assure you he would be just as good as Becker Lendl or JMac
And on decoturf he is clearly the greatest ever, look at his USO run and his MS-titles.
Well since Nadal has turned 21 this is how he has done vs Federer on slow grass:
2007- lost an extremely tough 5 set final, which in many ways he outplayed Federer (this was the consensus at the time amongst many experts all around the world), and with a serious injury obtained just before the 5th set.
2008- won an extremely tough 5 set final.
2009- couldnt play.
So basically the two have been virtually equal when able to play, and when Nadal wasnt a pre pubsecent boy with almost no grass experience yet.
As for decoturf Federer could be the greatest ever, he is more dominant at the U.S Open than Sampras, and in Masters events more successful to some degree. However Sampras had much tougher competition on decoturf, obviously has many more U.S Open finals, and has the same # of U.S Open titles at this point, and much more longevity at the event thus far (12 years apart in the finals). Actually so did McEnroe, Lendl, Connors, and others, even though I still narrowed it down to Federer vs Sampras for the greatest.
Well, thats your look at it.
Mine is that Nadal came on tour in 2004, did nothing at Wimbledon, in 2005 did nothing at Wimbledon. 2006 he got bagelled in a set, Fed relaxed for a while and Nadal grabbed a tiebreak, then Fed regrouped and strolled to Victory.
2007 WAS very impressive from Nadal, Fed didnt play his best imo (since Nadal is an expert bringing out the worst in him) but could still easily pull the 5th set off.
2008 The first 2 sets was by far the worse ive ever seen from Federer, he didnt play good in this final and still was very close to win it.
Nadal has got LOTS to proove before you can call him one of the greatest grasscourt players ever,imo thats insane.
To go with your theory, Wilander is the clay-GOAT, he beat both Vilas and Lendl in FO-finals.
About tough competition on Decoturf, Sampras had Agassi, nobody else until the end of his career when he ran into prime Safin and Prime Hewitt.
By that logic Kraijcek is the greatest grass court player of all time.
He has 100% success rate (even in sets won) against peak Sampras in Wimbledon.
Nadal nearly lost to grass clown Soderling in Wimbledon 2007. Soderling is a bad match-up for Nadal, it's not about Soderling beeing almost as good on grass as Federer (who barely won against the same Nadal).
Nadal is not in the same leage on grass as Federer, but he has a game that's very difficult for Federer.
If the grass was as fast and low-bouncing as it used to be we wouldn't see Nadal's forehands bouncing over Federer's head, and Federer likely wouldn't have lost the 08 final.
Agree with this, except Soderling is no grassclown...Had he not played Fed this year he would easily have had a QF or SF at Wimby.
Soderling's big game is effective on all surfaces when he plays well, but he isn't a good grass-courter.
Id say he belongs to best 10% of the grasscourt-players of the ATP-tour
It all depends on his form. He has the game to beat anyone on grass, he even nearly beat peak Federer on grass once, I think he had MP.
So far he hasn't done that much on grass, but it must be said that he underachieved big time on all surfaces in the last 4 years.
He was 3 points from winning vs Federer in Halle, no matchpoints. That was until their meeting in this years USO the only time he took a set of Federer. Soderling has said in Swedish newspapers that there is only one player on the ATP-tour that really scares me-Federer.
He did, because he was a nutcase and a mental midget on court, then he started working with Magnus Norman who obviously brought out the best in Soderling and they even made an agreement that if Soderling threw any of his notorious tantrums they would split.
He always had a huge game but had no idea how to bring it.
his record on carpet is : 50\19 with 2 titles...
as good as nalbandian and 10% of Borg´s (hardly a carpet goat) records
As ive said in other threads Fed and Nalbandian are the best indoor-players of this era imo, becker was the best of his and JMac and Lendl are tied in their era imo. Well pure speculation since there are so few, but levelwise. Had there been as many indoor-tourneys as there was in the 80`s Fed would definetely been up there.
4 out of Federer's first 5 finals where on carpet surfaces (starting in 2000).
Even back in 2000, when Federer was not even half the player he's these days (let alone 05-06 form), he was able to take Enqvis to 5.
That was around the time when more and more tournament stopped using carpet surfaces, one of the few carpet tournaments Federer played at his peak was Basel before the the surface change (06).
how can you say that?
Federer became pro in 1998
if you look to atp callendar in that year alone there were held 12 Carpet Tournaments.
9 in 1999
4 in 2000
5 in 2001
5 in 2002
5 in 2003
6 in 2004
8 in 2005
and so on... ( you get the idea)
so it seems preety lousy for player that you believe had much carpet prowess!
your point? the records speak for themselves... fed is impressive on deco, on reboud, on grass, you name it... Carpet? hardly!
Its my humble opinion, how many indoor-tournaments did Fed play since he hit his prime? 4 YE-championships and 1 runner-up isnt to bad right?
And Baby-Fed even toyed with close-to prime Ivanisevic on carpet.
and i respect that...
i just dont think it's that liquid that fed would be a carpet giant...
ps: there might be a slight confusion - indoor and carpet is not the same thing...
Its not,very possible though
I was thinking the same thing...are we talking indoors or indoor-carpet?
I would add Ljubicic and Safin to the mix.
In 2003 Federer played 2 carpet tournemnts after a very long season, losing early in both.
In 2004 he played 0 carpet tournaments.
In 2005 he played 1 carpet tournament, on a bad ankle (TMC) and lost in 5 sets against Nalbandian.
In 2006 he played 1 carpet tournament and won it
In 2007 he played 0 carpet tournaments, but won 2 DC matches on carpet (vs. Stepanek and Berdych)
In 2008 he played 0 carpet tournaments
In 2009 he played 0 carpet tournaments
2 carpet tournaments in the last 5 years, resulting in a final and a title.
Federer moves very well on carpet, has a big serve, solid volleys, can take the ball early on both sides and has a good return of big serves.
It's logical that a player like that does very well on indoor carpet. But even for Federer it's difficult to improve the win/loss record on a near-extinct surface.
Paris 2007 was still played on Taraflex, if I'm not mistaken. Madrid was indoors hardcourts, while Paris Bercy was still carpet.
2008 is when Paris switched to I.HC (and I think Lyon was probably the only one played on carpet)
2009, no carpet whatsoever.
while facing extinction (i agree), the tournaments were there for him even if only 4 or 5 each year. he chose to skip them... who's to blame? why did he skip them?
i was talking about carpet... not indoors hc!
Because his gap down to no 2 was so huge he simply didnt need to play them.
Separate names with a comma.